I’ll torpedo submarine deal: Shorten

    The Australian
    September 10, 2014


BILL Shorten has raised memories of World War II as he vowed to cancel any plan to buy completed submarines from Japan and build 12 boats for the navy in Adelaide if Labor wins the next federal election.      :-?

The Opposition Leader said the ALP would not be bound by any contracts signed by the ­Coalition to buy the next fleet of submarines from Japan, saying naval projects should ensure “jobs for Aussies”.

In comments that could affect the Abbott government’s commitment to closer military co-operation with Japan, Mr Shorten invoked World War II to warn against a deal with the Japanese.

“This is a government with a short memory,” he said. “In the Second World War, 366 merchant ships were sunk off Australia.”

Mr Shorten said the Coalition had lied before the election about its commitment to an Australian-built submarine as he accused it of pursuing a “bodgy” deal for cheaper off-the-shelf Japanese-­designed Soryu-class submarines.      :(

“They are contracting out the defence of Australia, they are fighting for jobs in foreign countries, not our own, and ... in uncertain times, they are playing with fire with our national security.”

Mr Shorten said he would dump any deal with Japan.

“Let me put on the record, Labor, if elected, will build submarines in Australia, unequivocally.

“If this government is committing us to 50 years and multiple billions of dollars, I don’t think that future governments automatically have to be bound to every mistake of the current government.”

It is understood that cabinet’s National Security Committee was to have signed off on some form of expression of interest in Australia obtaining Japanese submarines. But a formal contract would be a long time away, a source told The Australian.

The Australian has also been told our navy’s submariners know how good the Japanese Soryu class is because they have exercised with the boats secretly in north Asian waters.

The Soryu is said to be extremely quiet and the Americans, who have also exercised with the Soryus extensively, have urged Australia to buy them.

The Soryu submarines are built in sections that resemble a line of soft drink cans which are each then fitted out and welded together.

Those sections could be sent to Australia to be joined up in Adelaide, where the US combat system and torpedo tubes could also be fitted.

The first “flight” of two or three submarines could be built overseas by a workforce that could include key Australian personnel.

Later boats could be assembled in Australia which would give a local workforce the expertise to maintain the submarines and rebuild them when necessary.

Any shipyard jobs crisis caused by a change of submarine plans is likely to be 10 years away as it will be that long before the first steel is cut for the new submarine.

The so-called “Valley of Death” is the crunch time faced by the ship building industry when two major current projects, the three Air Warfare Destroyers and the two giant landing ships, are completed.

The Australian Business Defence Industry said that if the government abandoned plans to build the submarines in South Australia that would show a lack of strategic thinking and would have far reaching impacts on the industry.

“The government has a responsibility to provide for the defence of the nation but this is a more complex process than just focusing on the cost/capability trade-off of the submarine as a platform,” said the group’s manager, Graeme Dunk.

“Imagine having to send the submarine back to Japan every time it needs an oil change, especially during times of conflict.”

South Australian Premier Jay Weatherill said “it would be a monstrous act of betrayal” if the federal government did not build the submarines in Adelaide.      

In Beijing, Foreign Affairs University Asia Pacific Research Centre director Su Hao said Chinese military officials would be displeased that Australia chose Japan over China in the latest submarine deal.

“If Australia and Japan’s alliance becomes very solid then China could see that as a threat and I think the relationship between Australia and China could be impacted.”

Well....if Abbott tries to scrap building the subs in SA it will be another lie and it will also mean sending jobs and money offshore which will do a lot for Japan but absolutely nothing for Australia.
I can only assume this was part of Abbotts sneaky deal when he praised Japans war criminals.

What's a "Toepedo"?  :-/

Swagman wrote on Sep 10^th, 2014 at 8:23am:

What's a "Toepedo"?  :-/

its what you use to sink a pigeon toe

;D ;D ;D ;D

shorten doesn't give  crap where they are built.  he just thinks there are votes in it.  that's all he ever does.

Swagman wrote on Sep 10^th, 2014 at 8:23am:

What's a "Toepedo"?  :-/ Bill's gonna kick it into touch...

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 10^th, 2014 at 8:48am:

shorten doesn't give  crap where they are built.  he just thinks there are votes in it.  that's all he ever does.

Its no surprise that Longy supports Abbotts disgraceful anti South Australia campaign

adelcrow wrote on Sep 10^th, 2014 at 8:57am:

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 8:48am: shorten doesn't give  crap where they are built.  he just thinks there are votes in it.  that's all he ever does. Its no surprise that Longy supports Abbotts disgraceful anti South Australia campaign

above all, I'd like submarines that work.  the ASC hasn't don't a particularly good job at that.

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 10^th, 2014 at 8:48am:

shorten doesn't give  crap where they are built.  he just thinks there are votes in it.  that's all he ever does.

Im sure you typed that without the slightest blush as well :-/

Perhaps we should still be at war with Turkey, since we once were - a long time ago... Honestly, Shorten is an ass hat.

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 10^th, 2014 at 9:02am:

adelcrow wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 8:57am: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 8:48am: shorten doesn't give  crap where they are built.  he just thinks there are votes in it.  that's all he ever does. Its no surprise that Longy supports Abbotts disgraceful anti South Australia campaign above all, I'd like submarines that work.  the ASC hasn't don't a particularly good job at that.

Faulty welds, unreliable equipment, appalling availability. Why on Earth would investing in new subs built here be a good idea? Besides the poor workmanship, building here would add a premium of around $10-$15bn to the price. For that, I'd want the sub to be better than anything else in the world, which it clearly will not be. ASC can't even build the AWD on-time or on-budget and that's nowhere near as complicated to manufacture as a submarine.

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 10^th, 2014 at 8:48am:

shorten doesn't give  crap where they are built.  he just thinks there are votes in it.  that's all he ever does.

Sort of sounds a bit like "big ears combover" before last election eh Longprong?

I regard LongProng and Armpit as traitors wanting to sell their souls to the Nips.

Australian Jobs must come first.

TonyLiar strikes again

Dsmithy70 wrote on Sep 10^th, 2014 at 9:04am:

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 8:48am: shorten doesn't give  crap where they are built.  he just thinks there are votes in it.  that's all he ever does. Im sure you typed that without the slightest blush as well :-/

I was hoping someone might have picked up the irony.  You are probably the closest yet.  Because apparently everything Abbott does - even going to the aid of others or protecting aussie dead - is to gain votes, but nothing shorten does could possibly be that way?

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 10^th, 2014 at 9:29am:

Dsmithy70 wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 9:04am: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 8:48am: shorten doesn't give  crap where they are built.  he just thinks there are votes in it.  that's all he ever does. Im sure you typed that without the slightest blush as well :-/ I was hoping someone might have picked up the irony.  You are probably the closest yet.  Because apparently everything Abbott does - even going to the aid of others or protecting aussie dead - is to gain votes, but nothing shorten does could possibly be that way?

Lets just cut the crap

Both will do anything for a vote & thats all that matters.

no reason why they shouldn't build them here ... any issues with regarding quality can be overcome with the proper oversight. Its only when you have self regulation that things fall apart ...

asking the manufacturer themselves to test their own quality is like asking the banks to regulate themselves ... looks good on paper but in reality a waste of time

Swagman wrote on Sep 10^th, 2014 at 8:23am:

What's a "Toepedo"?  :-/

It's one mighty big kick in the asset delivering a serious bang that is big enough to sink silly ideas that might be forming inside the hull of a head.....

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 10^th, 2014 at 8:48am:

shorten doesn't give  crap where they are built.  he just thinks there are votes in it.  that's all he ever does.

And this makes him different HOW?  They're all the same.

Hmm - lemme think a minute here....

Japan sub might upset China.. so.. there is some suggestion we buy Chinese submarine?  Are the murky waters of the Yellow Sea even murkier than we thought, laden as they are with the urine of billions?  Hmmm...

Nah - Bill got it right - no way should we be compromising our security, and that means also in failing/refusing to establish and maintain Fortress Australia by having a force in place called 'ability to build/maintain warships'.  I've pointed out to yez before the idea of a 'force in place' - it's kinda like barbed wire set up so as to funnel any potential attacker into one place..... it exerts pressure without doing anything itself.

I've also mentioned that Japan is scenarioed as a potential future enemy with THE world's most sophisticated anti-submarine defense systems due to the demolition of its merchant marine in WWII by the US Silent Service.

Nice to see that Bill is edging closer to my GAIA concept in the Pilbara region.... for those who think that's too close to Indonesia etc.. I will remind you that most initial weapons of offense have strategic capability anyway, and the Pilbara is no more vulnerable  than Sydney or Malbun (*gasps - Adelaide - breeding ground of Vanstone?) to a first strike.

All we need now is a group of politicians and advisors (instead of divas) to same with some balls for Australia...

Some stimulating reading for yez:-

http://www.smh.com.au/national/australia-counters-chinese-threat-20120921-26c6j.html

http://www.dnaindia.com/analysis/standpoint-china-threat-propels-japan-pm-shinzo-abe-to-forge-stronger-ties-with-india-1951875

Japan seeks to surround China with a network of treaties, similar to Germany pre and post WWI.

http://www.nytimes.com/1990/06/18/books/after-the-cold-war-the-land-of-the-rising-threat.html

The last one is a bit dated, but keep an eye on this space... the conflict over the Pacific Region between the United States with its Manifest Destiny to move West and the Japanese Divine Mission to move East is now a silent war.. but it remains The Second Hundred Years War.

wrote on Sep 10^th, 2014 at 7:35am:

I’ll torpedo submarine deal: Shorten     The Australian     September 10, 2014 BILL Shorten has raised memories of World War II as he vowed to cancel any plan to buy completed submarines from Japan and build 12 boats for the navy in Adelaide if Labor wins the next federal election.      :-? “This is a government with a short memory,” he said. “In the Second World War, 366 merchant ships were sunk off Australia.” [...]

There's nothing wrong with our memory Mr Shorten you piece of union sh!t.


Quote:

Unions exposed as war saboteurs Perth lawyer Hal Colebatch has done the nation a service with his groundbreaking book, Australia’s Secret War, telling the untold story of union bastardry during World War 2. Using diary entries, letters and interviews with key witnesses, he has pieced together with forensic precision the tale of how Australia’s unions sabotaged the war effort, how wharfies vandalised, harassed, and robbed Australian troop ships, and probably cost lives. One of the most obscene acts occurred in October, 1945, at the end of the war, after Australian soldiers were released from Japanese prison camps. They were half dead, starving and desperate for home. But when the British aircraft-carrier HMS Speaker brought them into Sydney Harbour, the wharfies went on strike. For 36 hours, the soldiers were forced to remain on-board, tantalisingly close to home. This final act of cruelty from their countrymen was their thanks for all the sacrifice. Colebatch coolly recounts outrage after outrage. There were the radio valves pilfered by waterside workers in Townsville which prevented a new radar station at Green Island from operating. So when American dive bombers returning from a raid on a Japanese base were caught in an electrical storm and lost their bearings, there was no radio station to guide them to safety. Lost, they ran out of fuel and crashed, killing all 32 airmen. Colebatch quotes RAAF serviceman James Ahearn, who served at Green Island, where the Australians had to listen impotently to the doomed Americans’ radio calls: “The grief was compounded by the fact that had it not been for the greed and corruption on the Australian waterfront such lives would not have been needlessly lost.” http://blogs.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/mirandadevine/index.php/dailytelegraph/comments/unions_exposed_as_war_saboteurs/P40/

Yes, we remember Mr Phuking Shorten. We remember you and your stinking phuking union rabble.

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 10^th, 2014 at 9:02am:

adelcrow wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 8:57am: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 8:48am: shorten doesn't give  crap where they are built.  he just thinks there are votes in it.  that's all he ever does. Its no surprise that Longy supports Abbotts disgraceful anti South Australia campaign above all, I'd like submarines that work.  the ASC hasn't don't a particularly good job at that.

It's those flyscreens on the windows that don't work too well on the submarines... :D

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 10^th, 2014 at 9:02am:

above all, I'd like submarines that work.  the ASC hasn't don't a particularly good job at that.

Well the Collins class diesel electrics actually became quite a capable asset.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8Kv4rqR6RQ

John Smith wrote on Sep 10^th, 2014 at 9:53am:

no reason why they shouldn't build them here ... any issues with regarding quality can be overcome with the proper oversight. Its only when you have self regulation that things fall apart ... asking the manufacturer themselves to test their own quality is like asking the banks to regulate themselves ... looks good on paper but in reality a waste of time

Is the FACT that the Air Warfare Destroyers are $500m over budget and ATLEAST two years late not a good enough reason to NOT build the submarines here, in addition to the problems that plagued the construction and service of the current Collins Class submarine fleet??? Is the fact that building them abroad would cost roughly half the price of building them here not a good enough reason to NOT build the submarines here?

Dsmithy70 wrote on Sep 10^th, 2014 at 10:56am:

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 9:02am: above all, I'd like submarines that work.  the ASC hasn't don't a particularly good job at that. Well the Collins class diesel electrics actually became quite a capable asset. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8Kv4rqR6RQ

When they're serviceable, yeah, they're an exceptionally capable submarine. Much quieter than any nuclear submarine, albeit with a substantially lower endurance (range). The problem with the current submarines is their appalling rate of availability, which partly stems from problems with their construction, which was done by none other than ASC.

Swagman wrote on Sep 10^th, 2014 at 10:48am:

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 9:02am: adelcrow wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 8:57am: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 8:48am: shorten doesn't give  crap where they are built.  he just thinks there are votes in it.  that's all he ever does. Its no surprise that Longy supports Abbotts disgraceful anti South Australia campaign above all, I'd like submarines that work.  the ASC hasn't don't a particularly good job at that. It's those flyscreens on the windows that don't work too well on the submarines... :D

How do you sink an Irish submarine? Knock on the hatch. How do you sink an Aussie submarine? Get the unions to build it!

TWO Australian states are definitely leaners rather than lifters. South Australia and Tasmania would barely be viable were it not for financial assistance from the other states. Their economies are threadbare and, even worse, both appear to be making little effort at improving their own situation. 
 
These awkward facts are part of the reason for yesterday’s flurry of concern over suggestions Australia may seek to replace our submarine fleet with submarines made overseas, rather than in South Australia.

“No one can predict every threat or future conflict,” Labor leader Bill Shorten told workers at the Adelaide headquarters of naval shipbuilding company ASC. “But we do know that Australia will remain an island nation and submarine and shipbuilding is a strategic asset that we can’t let wither and die.”

Translated, that means continuing a weapons-as-welfare scheme for the benefit of the South Australian economy above Australia’s ­national interest.

Shorten went on to claim any move to source submarines from overseas would involve contracting Australia’s national security offshore. This suggests that by using foreign-made vessels Australia would somehow be in danger of ­exposing national military secrets to whichever nation supplies us with submarines, should such an arrangement occur.

Our current fleet of locally made Collins Class submarines had substantial foreign input during design and construction. According to one estimate, work on the Collins Class subs was contracted out to 426 companies in 12 different countries.

If Shorten is worried about foreigners using our subs to infiltrate Australian military information, he’d best start by looking at the vessels we presently have. Labor’s confected fury over foreign submarines is less to do with our nation’s best defence interests than it is to prop up Labor support in South Australia. A broader view would accept that there is at least some merit in looking at overseas sources for naval hardware.

“The most important thing is to get the best and most capable submarines at a reasonable price to the Australian taxpayer,” Prime Minister Tony Abbott said earlier this week, and he is correct. Submarines purchased from either Japan or Germany would cost around half the price of locally built vessels.

A truly enlightened military policy may even consider buying something equivalent to the US Navy’s Ohio-class submarines, complete with clean and long-­lasting nuclear power. The idea is worth suggesting, just to hear the reaction from the Greens.

Another military expert joined the debate yesterday. PUP senator Jacqui Lambie wants submarines built in Australia, and even claimed Tasmanian firms could fit out the next generation of vessels.

Sure they can, senator. We’ll get back to you the minute the navy ­decides to decorate our subs with dole forms, rollie papers and “Save the Franklin” stickers.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/opinion/security-a-priority-in-naval-hardware/story-fni0cwl5-1227053155812

Grappler Deep State Feller wrote on Sep 10^th, 2014 at 10:18am:

Swagman wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 8:23am: What's a "Toepedo"?  :-/ It's one mighty big kick in the asset delivering a serious bang that is big enough to sink silly ideas that might be forming inside the hull of a head.....

...aren't they those tight white bike pantsy thingys that you wear under your cricket strides to keep the olde 'box' in place...?

Armchair_Politician wrote on Sep 10^th, 2014 at 11:00am:

Get the unions to build it!

As opposed to an illiterate Sri Lankan on a 457 visa & $2 p/hour

Armchair_Politician wrote on Sep 10^th, 2014 at 10:57am:

John Smith wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 9:53am: no reason why they shouldn't build them here ... any issues with regarding quality can be overcome with the proper oversight. Its only when you have self regulation that things fall apart ... asking the manufacturer themselves to test their own quality is like asking the banks to regulate themselves ... looks good on paper but in reality a waste of time Is the FACT that the Air Warfare Destroyers are $500m over budget and ATLEAST two years late not a good enough reason to NOT build the submarines here, in addition to the problems that plagued the construction and service of the current Collins Class submarine fleet??? Is the fact that building them abroad would cost roughly half the price of building them here not a good enough reason to NOT build the submarines here?

Direct cost isn't the only factor.  You forgot that the profit (including skills/experience profit) from building onshore stays onshore... what happens at Whyalla stays at Whyalla...

I, for one, am mightily tired of off-shoring of profits and tax concessions that are bleeding this country dry.

Also - there are countless reason why a project would run over budget - labour is a minor cost factor.

" poor work standards, incorrect drawings and lack of coordination between the Spanish designed Navantia and the Air Warfare Destroyer Alliance. "

http://www.news.com.au/national/defences-air-warfare-destroyer-delayed-project-500m-over-budget/story-fncynjr2-1227024542952


For them that don't know - the major problem here is the management side - FGS - 'incorrect drawings'..... 'lack of coordination'.  HTF are the workers to do great work when they are continually in the dark and given wrong stuff to do, then re-do?

Where are these example of poor workmanship?  None cited.

That 'lack of co-ordination' sounds like a good motivator to get shipbuilding back on its feet here instead of liaising with overseas designers.

EVERY project runs over cost of original budget... one look at history will tell you that.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Sep 10^th, 2014 at 11:01am:

TWO Australian states are definitely leaners rather than lifters. South Australia and Tasmania would barely be viable were it not for financial assistance from the other states. Their economies are threadbare and, even worse, both appear to be making little effort at improving their own situation.    These awkward facts are part of the reason for yesterday’s flurry of concern over suggestions Australia may seek to replace our submarine fleet with submarines made overseas, rather than in South Australia. “No one can predict every threat or future conflict,” Labor leader Bill Shorten told workers at the Adelaide headquarters of naval shipbuilding company ASC. “But we do know that Australia will remain an island nation and submarine and shipbuilding is a strategic asset that we can’t let wither and die.” Translated, that means continuing a weapons-as-welfare scheme for the benefit of the South Australian economy above Australia’s ­national interest. Shorten went on to claim any move to source submarines from overseas would involve contracting Australia’s national security offshore. This suggests that by using foreign-made vessels Australia would somehow be in danger of ­exposing national military secrets to whichever nation supplies us with submarines, should such an arrangement occur. Our current fleet of locally made Collins Class submarines had substantial foreign input during design and construction. According to one estimate, work on the Collins Class subs was contracted out to 426 companies in 12 different countries. If Shorten is worried about foreigners using our subs to infiltrate Australian military information, he’d best start by looking at the vessels we presently have. Labor’s confected fury over foreign submarines is less to do with our nation’s best defence interests than it is to prop up Labor support in South Australia. A broader view would accept that there is at least some merit in looking at overseas sources for naval hardware. “The most important thing is to get the best and most capable submarines at a reasonable price to the Australian taxpayer,” Prime Minister Tony Abbott said earlier this week, and he is correct. Submarines purchased from either Japan or Germany would cost around half the price of locally built vessels. A truly enlightened military policy may even consider buying something equivalent to the US Navy’s Ohio-class submarines, complete with clean and long-­lasting nuclear power. The idea is worth suggesting, just to hear the reaction from the Greens. Another military expert joined the debate yesterday. PUP senator Jacqui Lambie wants submarines built in Australia, and even claimed Tasmanian firms could fit out the next generation of vessels. Sure they can, senator. We’ll get back to you the minute the navy ­decides to decorate our subs with dole forms, rollie papers and “Save the Franklin” stickers. http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/opinion/security-a-priority-in-naval-hardware/story-fni0cwl5-1227053155812

While it would be amusing to see how the Greens reacted to news that the Ohio Class was being considered, it'll never happen because (a) they're nuclear powered and we aren't a nuclear navy (for better or worse) and (b) at around 600ft long, it was originally designed to carry 24 inter-continental ballistic missiles with nuclear warheads. Sure, we could have the missile tubes altered to carry 24 cruise missiles instead, but I don't see us going for this kind of capability. The upside of the Ohio Class is they can stay submerged for three months straight without coming to the surface once and have the range to reach anywhere in the world - or as far as their food stores will last. But nuclear subs aren't as quiet as diesels and they're more expensive to buy/operate. If we did go down this path, I'd say instead of up to 12 diesel subs, we'd probably go for 4 or 5 nuclear submarines instead, due to the cost and the fact that nuclear subs need larger crews than diesels.

wrote on Sep 10^th, 2014 at 7:35am:

I’ll torpedo submarine deal: Shorten     The Australian     September 10, 2014 BILL Shorten has raised memories of World War II as he vowed to cancel any plan to buy completed submarines from Japan and build 12 boats for the navy in Adelaide if Labor wins the next federal election.      :-? The Opposition Leader said the ALP would not be bound by any contracts signed by the ­Coalition to buy the next fleet of submarines from Japan, saying naval projects should ensure “jobs for Aussies”.

No cretin, they are there to ensure Australia's strategic security, not provide jobs for your incompetent union mates.  >:(


The collins should put paid to any reason why usless Aussie tradesmen and engineers should be allowed anywhere near high tech military hardware.

Redmond Neck wrote on Sep 10^th, 2014 at 9:23am:

I regard LongProng and Armpit as traitors wanting to sell their souls to the Nips. Australian Jobs must come first. TonyLiar strikes again

Australian security should come first, if they can't build a decent sub then they should not be allowed to risk Australia's security, 'b'cause their takin our jaaaarbs'. Jeez even a window licker should understand that.

Dsmithy70 wrote on Sep 10^th, 2014 at 9:47am:

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 9:29am: Dsmithy70 wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 9:04am: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 8:48am: shorten doesn't give  crap where they are built.  he just thinks there are votes in it.  that's all he ever does. Im sure you typed that without the slightest blush as well :-/ I was hoping someone might have picked up the irony.  You are probably the closest yet.  Because apparently everything Abbott does - even going to the aid of others or protecting aussie dead - is to gain votes, but nothing shorten does could possibly be that way? Lets just cut the crap Both will do anything for a vote & thats all that matters.

the error is the word 'anything'.  While I believe both go out of their way for votes I also believe both have standards and a desire to do well by people, regardless of votes.  you way you have an excuse for abusing anything, any time while my way requires me to actually think.

BigOl64 wrote on Sep 10^th, 2014 at 11:30am:

Redmond Neck wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 9:23am: I regard LongProng and Armpit as traitors wanting to sell their souls to the Nips. Australian Jobs must come first. TonyLiar strikes again Australian security should come first, if they can't build a decent sub then they should not be allowed to risk Australia's security, 'b'cause their takin our jaaaarbs'. Jeez even a window licker should understand that.

I'd love to have the subs built here - even at a price premium.  But I see no point in building subs that cant do the job.  the Collins class are excellent - when they work.  but we need them all working, all the time.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Sep 10^th, 2014 at 10:57am:

John Smith wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 9:53am: no reason why they shouldn't build them here ... any issues with regarding quality can be overcome with the proper oversight. Its only when you have self regulation that things fall apart ... asking the manufacturer themselves to test their own quality is like asking the banks to regulate themselves ... looks good on paper but in reality a waste of time Is the FACT that the Air Warfare Destroyers are $500m over budget and ATLEAST two years late not a good enough reason to NOT build the submarines here, in addition to the problems that plagued the construction and service of the current Collins Class submarine fleet??? Is the fact that building them abroad would cost roughly half the price of building them here not a good enough reason to NOT build the submarines here?

no

John Smith wrote on Sep 10^th, 2014 at 12:36pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 10:57am: John Smith wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 9:53am: no reason why they shouldn't build them here ... any issues with regarding quality can be overcome with the proper oversight. Its only when you have self regulation that things fall apart ... asking the manufacturer themselves to test their own quality is like asking the banks to regulate themselves ... looks good on paper but in reality a waste of time Is the FACT that the Air Warfare Destroyers are $500m over budget and ATLEAST two years late not a good enough reason to NOT build the submarines here, in addition to the problems that plagued the construction and service of the current Collins Class submarine fleet??? Is the fact that building them abroad would cost roughly half the price of building them here not a good enough reason to NOT build the submarines here? no

Nice to know you believe that our sailors should be forced to settle for an inferior submarine that will not perform as well or provide the same level of safety as other submarines manufactured abroad, just for the sake of keeping some jobs here. Never mind that it may cost the lives of our sailors, eh?

Armchair_Politician wrote on Sep 10^th, 2014 at 12:43pm:

John Smith wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 12:36pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 10:57am: John Smith wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 9:53am: no reason why they shouldn't build them here ... any issues with regarding quality can be overcome with the proper oversight. Its only when you have self regulation that things fall apart ... asking the manufacturer themselves to test their own quality is like asking the banks to regulate themselves ... looks good on paper but in reality a waste of time Is the FACT that the Air Warfare Destroyers are $500m over budget and ATLEAST two years late not a good enough reason to NOT build the submarines here, in addition to the problems that plagued the construction and service of the current Collins Class submarine fleet??? Is the fact that building them abroad would cost roughly half the price of building them here not a good enough reason to NOT build the submarines here? no Nice to know you believe that our sailors should be forced to settle for an inferior submarine that will not perform as well or provide the same level of safety as other submarines manufactured abroad, just for the sake of keeping some jobs here. Never mind that it may cost the lives of our sailors, eh?

fcvk me, you got all that rubbish from 'no'?   ;D ;D ;D shows just how delluded you are ...

I noticed you ignored grapplers post ... why is that? tired of looking like the forums whipping boy?

Great to see Bill Shorten standing up for Australian workers.  Abbott wants to buy Japanese "Home Brand" short life rubbish.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/defence/submarine-plan-a-threat-to-national-security-labor/story-e6frg8yo-1227052518280?nk=4f85ab01d57e393e5b325a2877b456d8

JAPANESE submarines under consideration for the Navy are inferior “home brand” products, Labor says, as it warned the death of Australia’s own industry would threaten national security.

The Abbott government has concluded building a new fleet of submarines in Australia would be risky and expensive, and is instead considering “off-the shelf” options from Japan and Germany, with the Soryu-class boat the frontrunner.

Opposition Leader Bill Shorten’s “last minute pressure” on the government to keep its election commitment to build 12 submarines in Adelaide comes as an Australian Strategic Policy Institute paper warns buying the Japanese boats “would alarm China and heighten Beijing’s fears of containment by the United States” and its allies.

John Smith wrote on Sep 10^th, 2014 at 12:48pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 12:43pm: John Smith wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 12:36pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 10:57am: John Smith wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 9:53am: no reason why they shouldn't build them here ... any issues with regarding quality can be overcome with the proper oversight. Its only when you have self regulation that things fall apart ... asking the manufacturer themselves to test their own quality is like asking the banks to regulate themselves ... looks good on paper but in reality a waste of time Is the FACT that the Air Warfare Destroyers are $500m over budget and ATLEAST two years late not a good enough reason to NOT build the submarines here, in addition to the problems that plagued the construction and service of the current Collins Class submarine fleet??? Is the fact that building them abroad would cost roughly half the price of building them here not a good enough reason to NOT build the submarines here? no Nice to know you believe that our sailors should be forced to settle for an inferior submarine that will not perform as well or provide the same level of safety as other submarines manufactured abroad, just for the sake of keeping some jobs here. Never mind that it may cost the lives of our sailors, eh? fcvk me, you got all that rubbish from 'no'?   ;D ;D ;D shows just how delluded you are ... I noticed you ignored grapplers post ... why is that? tired of looking like the forums whipping boy?

... said the forums' whipping boy!!!  ;D ;D ;D

Armchair_Politician wrote on Sep 10^th, 2014 at 2:37pm:

John Smith wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 12:48pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 12:43pm: John Smith wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 12:36pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 10:57am: John Smith wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 9:53am: no reason why they shouldn't build them here ... any issues with regarding quality can be overcome with the proper oversight. Its only when you have self regulation that things fall apart ... asking the manufacturer themselves to test their own quality is like asking the banks to regulate themselves ... looks good on paper but in reality a waste of time Is the FACT that the Air Warfare Destroyers are $500m over budget and ATLEAST two years late not a good enough reason to NOT build the submarines here, in addition to the problems that plagued the construction and service of the current Collins Class submarine fleet??? Is the fact that building them abroad would cost roughly half the price of building them here not a good enough reason to NOT build the submarines here? no Nice to know you believe that our sailors should be forced to settle for an inferior submarine that will not perform as well or provide the same level of safety as other submarines manufactured abroad, just for the sake of keeping some jobs here. Never mind that it may cost the lives of our sailors, eh? fcvk me, you got all that rubbish from 'no'?   ;D ;D ;D shows just how delluded you are ... I noticed you ignored grapplers post ... why is that? tired of looking like the forums whipping boy? ... said the forums' whipping boy!!!  ;D ;D ;D

yes armpit, I know, you haven't got the brains to come up with something on your own  :'( :'( :'(..

I'm actually surprised you haven't called me armpit yet  ;D ;D ;D

John Smith wrote on Sep 10^th, 2014 at 2:58pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 2:37pm: John Smith wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 12:48pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 12:43pm: John Smith wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 12:36pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 10:57am: John Smith wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 9:53am: no reason why they shouldn't build them here ... any issues with regarding quality can be overcome with the proper oversight. Its only when you have self regulation that things fall apart ... asking the manufacturer themselves to test their own quality is like asking the banks to regulate themselves ... looks good on paper but in reality a waste of time Is the FACT that the Air Warfare Destroyers are $500m over budget and ATLEAST two years late not a good enough reason to NOT build the submarines here, in addition to the problems that plagued the construction and service of the current Collins Class submarine fleet??? Is the fact that building them abroad would cost roughly half the price of building them here not a good enough reason to NOT build the submarines here? no Nice to know you believe that our sailors should be forced to settle for an inferior submarine that will not perform as well or provide the same level of safety as other submarines manufactured abroad, just for the sake of keeping some jobs here. Never mind that it may cost the lives of our sailors, eh? fcvk me, you got all that rubbish from 'no'?   ;D ;D ;D shows just how delluded you are ... I noticed you ignored grapplers post ... why is that? tired of looking like the forums whipping boy? ... said the forums' whipping boy!!!  ;D ;D ;D yes armpit, I know, you haven't got the brains to come up with something on your own  :'( :'( :'(.. I'm actually surprised you haven't called me armpit yet  ;D ;D ;D

Get back to me when you discover a point of view other than that of the Party...

Armchair_Politician wrote on Sep 10^th, 2014 at 6:36pm:

John Smith wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 2:58pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 2:37pm: John Smith wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 12:48pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 12:43pm: John Smith wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 12:36pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 10:57am: John Smith wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 9:53am: no reason why they shouldn't build them here ... any issues with regarding quality can be overcome with the proper oversight. Its only when you have self regulation that things fall apart ... asking the manufacturer themselves to test their own quality is like asking the banks to regulate themselves ... looks good on paper but in reality a waste of time Is the FACT that the Air Warfare Destroyers are $500m over budget and ATLEAST two years late not a good enough reason to NOT build the submarines here, in addition to the problems that plagued the construction and service of the current Collins Class submarine fleet??? Is the fact that building them abroad would cost roughly half the price of building them here not a good enough reason to NOT build the submarines here? no Nice to know you believe that our sailors should be forced to settle for an inferior submarine that will not perform as well or provide the same level of safety as other submarines manufactured abroad, just for the sake of keeping some jobs here. Never mind that it may cost the lives of our sailors, eh? fcvk me, you got all that rubbish from 'no'?   ;D ;D ;D shows just how delluded you are ... I noticed you ignored grapplers post ... why is that? tired of looking like the forums whipping boy? ... said the forums' whipping boy!!!  ;D ;D ;D yes armpit, I know, you haven't got the brains to come up with something on your own  :'( :'( :'(.. I'm actually surprised you haven't called me armpit yet  ;D ;D ;D Get back to me when you discover a point of view other than that of the Party...

hahaha ...

no wonder you copy my comments ;D ;D ;D ;D

Labor will never help Abbott break his promises....so get used to it

Armchair_Politician wrote on Sep 10^th, 2014 at 12:43pm:

John Smith wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 12:36pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 10:57am: John Smith wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 9:53am: no reason why they shouldn't build them here ... any issues with regarding quality can be overcome with the proper oversight. Its only when you have self regulation that things fall apart ... asking the manufacturer themselves to test their own quality is like asking the banks to regulate themselves ... looks good on paper but in reality a waste of time Is the FACT that the Air Warfare Destroyers are $500m over budget and ATLEAST two years late not a good enough reason to NOT build the submarines here, in addition to the problems that plagued the construction and service of the current Collins Class submarine fleet??? Is the fact that building them abroad would cost roughly half the price of building them here not a good enough reason to NOT build the submarines here? no Nice to know you believe that our sailors should be forced to settle for an inferior submarine that will not perform as well or provide the same level of safety as other submarines manufactured abroad, just for the sake of keeping some jobs here. Never mind that it may cost the lives of our sailors, eh?

And you know all this how?  You would rather rely on the opinions of 'experts' with a vested interest, governed b y economic considerations of parsimony to suit an ideology?

You really expect me to believe that Joe Hockey, Tony Abbott, Julia Gillard, Kevin Rudd, and all their paid advisors really know what they are talking about as regards submarines?

http://www.mastermariners.org.au/2014-01-17-01-18-06/news-international/1554-german-subs-safer-bet-for-ran-replacement

http://thediplomat.com/2012/07/australias-japanese-sub-play/

https://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/australias-next-generation-submarines-05917/

You really need to look at  some of the 'fine print' here.  e.g. Australia can only 'staff' two of its submarines..... now....

Is this entire issue all about building and what will be built?

Perhaps a little look at the specifications of the contenders is in order........

Someone else like to do some work and get a brownie point?

How about a new SUBMARINE DESIGN?

http://news.usni.org/2014/07/07/japan-australia-cooperate-new-submarine-design

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 10^th, 2014 at 9:02am:

adelcrow wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 8:57am: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 8:48am: shorten doesn't give  crap where they are built.  he just thinks there are votes in it.  that's all he ever does. Its no surprise that Longy supports Abbotts disgraceful anti South Australia campaign above all, I'd like submarines that work.  the ASC hasn't don't a particularly good job at that.

Would you forgive the Aussie workers if they do manage to get
all 6 Collins subs operational & out to sea?

Grappler Deep State Feller wrote on Sep 10^th, 2014 at 8:28pm:

You really expect me to believe that Joe Hockey, Tony Abbott, Julia Gillard, Kevin Rudd, and all their paid advisors really know what they are talking about as regards submarines?

they put Mirrabella on the board of advisors for christs sake ...... as if she has the slightest clue?

the closest she ever got to a sub or submarine warfare was when two sailors started jostling over who went first for a headjob from her.

John Smith wrote on Sep 10^th, 2014 at 10:30pm:

Grappler Deep State Feller wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 8:28pm: You really expect me to believe that Joe Hockey, Tony Abbott, Julia Gillard, Kevin Rudd, and all their paid advisors really know what they are talking about as regards submarines? they put Mirrabella on the board of advisors for christs sake ...... as if has has the slightest clue? the closest she ever got to a sub or submarine warfare was when two sailors started jostling over who went first for a headjob from her.

Yes - these ridiculous political appointments are a joke - a costly one as well.  I challenge the 'need' to even have a submarine corporation at prohibitive cost for nothing but sitting in once in a while for a few mates and handling paperwork already organised by public servants for you - like that stupid commission of audit.

Waste of good money handed out to old mates and cronies.  All this will be banned when my party takes power and all such appointments retrospectively abolished.

There is no right to income for life for being a political stooge, and you cop the same deal as everyone else out of a job.  Go earn or learn..... or live on your available money until age 70.

Were those Australian sailors?

Lift dat cotton and kick dat page...... http://emoticonists.com/1024/clip-art-of-a-happy-ball-character-playing-kick-the-can-by-johnny-sajem-107.jpg

I think that Australia has got the ability to build Submarines - but like Qantas, the Govt and other Companies just don't want to pay top $$$ for such 'Quality' workmanship.


Considering we have just recently built a Submersible to take James Cameron down to the deepest part of the ocean.

But maybe we must face the fact with 'Military' that its much like a Holden compared to a Toyota and we must bite the bullet and 'sell out'. Just because its 'Australian', doesn't necessary make it 'good'.

I think that Whyalla and South Australia should be given a 'Fair Go' though.

Nippon Subs? Well they might be like those Millenium Trains & BlackHawk Helicopters =  :P  :P

Bobby. wrote on Sep 10^th, 2014 at 8:51pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 9:02am: adelcrow wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 8:57am: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 8:48am: shorten doesn't give  crap where they are built.  he just thinks there are votes in it.  that's all he ever does. Its no surprise that Longy supports Abbotts disgraceful anti South Australia campaign above all, I'd like submarines that work.  the ASC hasn't don't a particularly good job at that. Would you forgive the Aussie workers if they do manage to get all 6 Collins subs operational & out to sea?

No, because it would've taken far too long and far too much money to do so.

John Smith wrote on Sep 10^th, 2014 at 10:30pm:

Grappler Deep State Feller wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 8:28pm: You really expect me to believe that Joe Hockey, Tony Abbott, Julia Gillard, Kevin Rudd, and all their paid advisors really know what they are talking about as regards submarines? they put Mirrabella on the board of advisors for christs sake ...... as if she has the slightest clue? the closest she ever got to a sub or submarine warfare was when two sailors started jostling over who went first for a headjob from her.

If you think she's there to offer a technical point of view, you've got more rocks in your head than I thought. She's there for a political point of view. Only an imbecile would think she'd be there to give expert technical advice!

Armchair_Politician wrote on Sep 11^th, 2014 at 8:23am:

John Smith wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 10:30pm: Grappler Deep State Feller wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 8:28pm: You really expect me to believe that Joe Hockey, Tony Abbott, Julia Gillard, Kevin Rudd, and all their paid advisors really know what they are talking about as regards submarines? they put Mirrabella on the board of advisors for christs sake ...... as if she has the slightest clue? the closest she ever got to a sub or submarine warfare was when two sailors started jostling over who went first for a headjob from her. If you think she's there to offer a technical point of view, you've got more rocks in your head than I thought. She's there for a political point of view. Only an imbecile would think she'd be there to give expert technical advice!

thats the whole argument you dickhead ... why do they need politics to build a submarine? They would be much better off pay independant experienced engineers to oversee the work instead and just maybe they can build it without all the faults that we saw with the Collins subs.

Jasin wrote on Sep 10^th, 2014 at 11:07pm:

I think that Australia has got the ability to build Submarines - but like Qantas, the Govt and other Companies just don't want to pay top $$$ for such 'Quality' workmanship. Considering we have just recently built a Submersible to take James Cameron down to the deepest part of the ocean. But maybe we must face the fact with 'Military' that its much like a Holden compared to a Toyota and we must bite the bullet and 'sell out'. Just because its 'Australian', doesn't necessary make it 'good'. I think that Whyalla and South Australia should be given a 'Fair Go' though. Nippon Subs? Well they might be like those Millenium Trains & BlackHawk Helicopters =  :P  :P

You're wrong, so very wrong. We did that with the Collins-Class and that was a debacle. We've done that with the Air Warfare Destroyers and they're half a billion dollars over-budget and at least two years late. See the link below for the litany of problems that have plagued the Collins-Class submarines - all because we wanted to build them here. Sometimes you've just got to acknowledge that there's some things we do well and some things we don't and that the things we don't do well are best left to others.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collins-class_submarine#Construction

John Smith wrote on Sep 11^th, 2014 at 8:26am:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Sep 11th, 2014 at 8:23am: John Smith wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 10:30pm: Grappler Deep State Feller wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 8:28pm: You really expect me to believe that Joe Hockey, Tony Abbott, Julia Gillard, Kevin Rudd, and all their paid advisors really know what they are talking about as regards submarines? they put Mirrabella on the board of advisors for christs sake ...... as if she has the slightest clue? the closest she ever got to a sub or submarine warfare was when two sailors started jostling over who went first for a headjob from her. If you think she's there to offer a technical point of view, you've got more rocks in your head than I thought. She's there for a political point of view. Only an imbecile would think she'd be there to give expert technical advice! thats the whole argument you dickhead ... why do they need politics to build a submarine? They would be much better off pay independant experienced engineers to oversee the work instead and just maybe they can build it without all the faults that we saw with the Collins subs.

Gawd, you really are stupid. Someone has to think about the political ramifications of defence acquisitions. Imagine if the RAAF wanted to buy B-52 bombers in the 80's. Imagine the political ramifications of such a purchase with countries such as China and the Soviet Union. Defence doesn't think along those lines -  that's the job of politicians and diplomats. If you have a brain, try using it. If you don't try eBay.

you're an idiot armpit, no matter what poo they shovel, you stand there with your mouth wide open swallowing everything that comes your way ...

Mirrabella is just there for the paycheck ... defence minister and the minister for feorign affairs job to worry about any political ramifications, not mirrabella ....

John Smith wrote on Sep 11^th, 2014 at 8:38am:

you're an idiot armpit, no matter what poo they shovel, you stand there with your mouth wide open swallowing everything that comes your way ... Mirrabella is just there for the paycheck ... defence minister and the minister for feorign affairs job to worry about any political ramifications, not mirrabella ....

You really are stupid if you think the Defence Minister and Foreign Minister are the only ones who are paid to consider the political aspect of military acquisitions. ::)

Jasin wrote on Sep 10^th, 2014 at 11:07pm:

I think that Australia has got the ability to build Submarines - but like Qantas, the Govt and other Companies just don't want to pay top $$$ for such 'Quality' workmanship. Considering we have just recently built a Submersible to take James Cameron down to the deepest part of the ocean. But maybe we must face the fact with 'Military' that its much like a Holden compared to a Toyota and we must bite the bullet and 'sell out'. Just because its 'Australian', doesn't necessary make it 'good'. I think that Whyalla and South Australia should be given a 'Fair Go' though. Nippon Subs? Well they might be like those Millenium Trains & BlackHawk Helicopters =  :P  :P

You seem to want to prove that you know less and less about this subject with every post you make.


WTF do a train and Blackhawks have to do with the aquisition of submarines

Armchair_Politician wrote on Sep 11^th, 2014 at 8:42am:

John Smith wrote on Sep 11th, 2014 at 8:38am: you're an idiot armpit, no matter what poo they shovel, you stand there with your mouth wide open swallowing everything that comes your way ... Mirrabella is just there for the paycheck ... defence minister and the minister for feorign affairs job to worry about any political ramifications, not mirrabella .... You really are stupid if you think the Defence Minister and Foreign Minister are the only ones who are paid to consider the political aspect of military acquisitions. ::)

I didn't say they were the only ones dickhead .. they each have hundreds if not thousands of staff under them to consider things for them, not to mention all the intelligence agencies

John Smith wrote on Sep 11^th, 2014 at 8:51am:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Sep 11th, 2014 at 8:42am: John Smith wrote on Sep 11th, 2014 at 8:38am: you're an idiot armpit, no matter what poo they shovel, you stand there with your mouth wide open swallowing everything that comes your way ... Mirrabella is just there for the paycheck ... defence minister and the minister for feorign affairs job to worry about any political ramifications, not mirrabella .... You really are stupid if you think the Defence Minister and Foreign Minister are the only ones who are paid to consider the political aspect of military acquisitions. ::) I didn't say they were the only ones dickhead .. they each have hundreds if not thousands of staff under them to consider things for them, not to mention all the intelligence agencies

Yes, and military contractors also have political staff in their employ - Northrop, BAE, ASC, Boeing Defense - all have staff employed for the political aspect of military acquisitions.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Sep 11^th, 2014 at 8:59am:

John Smith wrote on Sep 11th, 2014 at 8:51am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Sep 11th, 2014 at 8:42am: John Smith wrote on Sep 11th, 2014 at 8:38am: you're an idiot armpit, no matter what poo they shovel, you stand there with your mouth wide open swallowing everything that comes your way ... Mirrabella is just there for the paycheck ... defence minister and the minister for feorign affairs job to worry about any political ramifications, not mirrabella .... You really are stupid if you think the Defence Minister and Foreign Minister are the only ones who are paid to consider the political aspect of military acquisitions. ::) I didn't say they were the only ones dickhead .. they each have hundreds if not thousands of staff under them to consider things for them, not to mention all the intelligence agencies Yes, and military contractors also have political staff in their employ - Northrop, BAE, ASC, Boeing Defense - all have staff employed for the political aspect of military acquisitions.

military contractors can employ who ever they like .... this is a govt. appointed board mirrabella is on.

John Smith wrote on Sep 11^th, 2014 at 9:37am:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Sep 11th, 2014 at 8:59am: John Smith wrote on Sep 11th, 2014 at 8:51am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Sep 11th, 2014 at 8:42am: John Smith wrote on Sep 11th, 2014 at 8:38am: you're an idiot armpit, no matter what poo they shovel, you stand there with your mouth wide open swallowing everything that comes your way ... Mirrabella is just there for the paycheck ... defence minister and the minister for feorign affairs job to worry about any political ramifications, not mirrabella .... You really are stupid if you think the Defence Minister and Foreign Minister are the only ones who are paid to consider the political aspect of military acquisitions. ::) I didn't say they were the only ones dickhead .. they each have hundreds if not thousands of staff under them to consider things for them, not to mention all the intelligence agencies Yes, and military contractors also have political staff in their employ - Northrop, BAE, ASC, Boeing Defense - all have staff employed for the political aspect of military acquisitions. military contractors can employ who ever they like .... this is a govt. appointed board mirrabella is on.

... that bids on military contracts. Der!!!  :D :D :D

Armchair_Politician wrote on Sep 11^th, 2014 at 8:29am:

Jasin wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 11:07pm: I think that Australia has got the ability to build Submarines - but like Qantas, the Govt and other Companies just don't want to pay top $$$ for such 'Quality' workmanship. Considering we have just recently built a Submersible to take James Cameron down to the deepest part of the ocean. But maybe we must face the fact with 'Military' that its much like a Holden compared to a Toyota and we must bite the bullet and 'sell out'. Just because its 'Australian', doesn't necessary make it 'good'. I think that Whyalla and South Australia should be given a 'Fair Go' though. Nippon Subs? Well they might be like those Millenium Trains & BlackHawk Helicopters =  :P  :P You're wrong, so very wrong. We did that with the Collins-Class and that was a debacle. We've done that with the Air Warfare Destroyers and they're half a billion dollars over-budget and at least two years late. See the link below for the litany of problems that have plagued the Collins-Class submarines - all because we wanted to build them here. Sometimes you've just got to acknowledge that there's some things we do well and some things we don't and that the things we don't do well are best left to others. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collins-class_submarine#Construction

It seems at the moment that's about everything apart from dole queue etiquette....  I'm sure the governments of the last several decades accept zero responsibility for any problems with the building of ships here - considering they wound down the ship-building capacity of Oz on economic grounds, thus reducing the skills level and destroying the skills and experience infrastructure required.

Long way to go back now to get it kick-started again - these submarines are just the thing to start.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Sep 11^th, 2014 at 10:19am:

John Smith wrote on Sep 11th, 2014 at 9:37am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Sep 11th, 2014 at 8:59am: John Smith wrote on Sep 11th, 2014 at 8:51am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Sep 11th, 2014 at 8:42am: John Smith wrote on Sep 11th, 2014 at 8:38am: you're an idiot armpit, no matter what poo they shovel, you stand there with your mouth wide open swallowing everything that comes your way ... Mirrabella is just there for the paycheck ... defence minister and the minister for feorign affairs job to worry about any political ramifications, not mirrabella .... You really are stupid if you think the Defence Minister and Foreign Minister are the only ones who are paid to consider the political aspect of military acquisitions. ::) I didn't say they were the only ones dickhead .. they each have hundreds if not thousands of staff under them to consider things for them, not to mention all the intelligence agencies Yes, and military contractors also have political staff in their employ - Northrop, BAE, ASC, Boeing Defense - all have staff employed for the political aspect of military acquisitions. military contractors can employ who ever they like .... this is a govt. appointed board mirrabella is on. ... that bids on military contracts. Der!!!  :D :D :D

A sinecure without valid work by any other name - for what reason is a government-appointed body 'needed' to bid on military contracts?  This is just another rip-off job for the mates/cronies at the whim of the government stooges.

If the Unions did that you'd be screaming blue murder.

The End of the Age of Entitlement also means the abolition of such wasteful, unnecessary, duplicative (new word?), and politically driven no-jobs just to give old pals an fat income for doing nothing when they have failed their electorate.

John Smith wrote on Sep 11^th, 2014 at 9:37am:

military contractors can employ who ever they like .... this is a govt. appointed board mirrabella is on.

Nope not at all, depending on the project employees and management get scrutinised and suppliers to that company also get scrutinised (or they get affirmations) to confirm they comply with some government contracting principles and ISOs.

Datalife wrote on Sep 11^th, 2014 at 10:47am:

John Smith wrote on Sep 11th, 2014 at 9:37am: military contractors can employ who ever they like .... this is a govt. appointed board mirrabella is on. Nope not at all, depending on the project employees and management get scrutinised and suppliers to that company also get scrutinised (or they get affirmations) to confirm they comply with some government contracting principles and ISOs.

yes yes, i know .... that wasn't what we were talking about but good side track

Armchair_Politician wrote on Sep 11^th, 2014 at 10:19am:

John Smith wrote on Sep 11th, 2014 at 9:37am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Sep 11th, 2014 at 8:59am: John Smith wrote on Sep 11th, 2014 at 8:51am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Sep 11th, 2014 at 8:42am: John Smith wrote on Sep 11th, 2014 at 8:38am: you're an idiot armpit, no matter what poo they shovel, you stand there with your mouth wide open swallowing everything that comes your way ... Mirrabella is just there for the paycheck ... defence minister and the minister for feorign affairs job to worry about any political ramifications, not mirrabella .... You really are stupid if you think the Defence Minister and Foreign Minister are the only ones who are paid to consider the political aspect of military acquisitions. ::) I didn't say they were the only ones dickhead .. they each have hundreds if not thousands of staff under them to consider things for them, not to mention all the intelligence agencies Yes, and military contractors also have political staff in their employ - Northrop, BAE, ASC, Boeing Defense - all have staff employed for the political aspect of military acquisitions. military contractors can employ who ever they like .... this is a govt. appointed board mirrabella is on. ... that bids on military contracts. Der!!!  :D :D :D

;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

So the govt. is bidding for its own contracts?  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D She isn't hired by the contractor she's hired by the govt. ...its tax dollars paying her salary, not shareholder dollars

Bobby. wrote on Sep 10^th, 2014 at 8:51pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 9:02am: adelcrow wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 8:57am: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 8:48am: shorten doesn't give  crap where they are built.  he just thinks there are votes in it.  that's all he ever does. Its no surprise that Longy supports Abbotts disgraceful anti South Australia campaign above all, I'd like submarines that work.  the ASC hasn't don't a particularly good job at that. Would you forgive the Aussie workers if they do manage to get all 6 Collins subs operational & out to sea?

No reply from Longy.

The question is too hard for him.

He's here:-

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1410405612/15#15

I suppose he figures he should try his mettle out on me and argue with me over LurkChoices - the WorkChoices you ahve when you're not having WorkChoices....

I re-state my initial position - in order to have work choices you first need to have work available.... same as 'dole bludgers' - first offer them a job that pays enough to live on without spending all their money to get there, and only then attack and punish them for being slackers and leaners.

I'm 65 - anyone prepared to offer me a full-time job at proper rates?  I'm in the market - hell - I'll even offer ASIO (again) the chance to pull me in and have someone on board with some sense and knowledge of things arcane that they miss.. they don't yet realise they always needed me, and left me out in the cold to be 'discredited' by their lackeys.  A 'copper' I'm not - could never stoop so low - but I sure can do stuff.... and I'm not limited by 'copper syndrome' as so many are in their work....

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 10^th, 2014 at 8:48am:

shorten doesn't give  crap where they are built.  he just thinks there are votes in it.  that's all he ever does.

Shorten should have had the guts and integrity to stand up to Abbott and not agreed to ultimately support the contract. A $40 billion injection to Japan with our money! With so many industries going offshore and work being outsourced - where is the loyalty from our leaders? Shorten won't score points over his compliance.

Every submarine, aircraft, bus or train we've imported has had huge problems and ultimately ended up going way over budget.

Australia's Industry Policy

The AIP National Framework sets out four strategic approaches to promote Australian industry participation:

■encouraging industry to meet world’s best practice through capability building;

■early identification of opportunities for Australian industry participation both domestically and overseas;

■promoting Australian capability and integrating industry into global supply chains; and

■enhancing project facilitation and Australian industry participation.

http://www.industry.gov.au/industry/AustralianIndustryParticipation/Pages/AustralianIndustryParticipationNationalFramework.aspx

mantra wrote on Sep 12^th, 2014 at 5:13am:

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 8:48am: shorten doesn't give  crap where they are built.  he just thinks there are votes in it.  that's all he ever does. Shorten should have had the guts and integrity to stand up to Abbott and not agreed to ultimately support the contract. A $40 billion injection to Japan with our money! With so many industries going offshore and work being outsourced - where is the loyalty from our leaders? Shorten won't score points over his compliance. Every submarine, aircraft, bus or train we've imported has had huge problems and ultimately ended up going way over budget.

Some military hardware has problems some does not, it depends on the level of new technology involved; F-35 yes, F-111 yes, both F-18's no, C17 No.  If we blunder down this path again, the problems will compound because the ASC if friggen clueless and not very good at building subs.

As for loyalty, how about some loyalty to those that have to man these subs, what about their livelihood or their lives for that matter?

If the ASC wasn't so crap, they would hve been considered; it is their fault they are no longer considered as a viable shipbuilder. You want to point the finger, point it where it belongs.

mantra wrote on Sep 12^th, 2014 at 5:13am:

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 8:48am: shorten doesn't give  crap where they are built.  he just thinks there are votes in it.  that's all he ever does. Shorten should have had the guts and integrity to stand up to Abbott and not agreed to ultimately support the contract. A $40 billion injection to Japan with our money! With so many industries going offshore and work being outsourced - where is the loyalty from our leaders? Shorten won't score points over his compliance. Every submarine, aircraft, bus or train we've imported has had huge problems and ultimately ended up going way over budget.

every one???  some yes, but not all or even close.

Bobby. wrote on Sep 11^th, 2014 at 8:02pm:

Bobby. wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 8:51pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 9:02am: adelcrow wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 8:57am: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 8:48am: shorten doesn't give  crap where they are built.  he just thinks there are votes in it.  that's all he ever does. Its no surprise that Longy supports Abbotts disgraceful anti South Australia campaign above all, I'd like submarines that work.  the ASC hasn't don't a particularly good job at that. Would you forgive the Aussie workers if they do manage to get all 6 Collins subs operational & out to sea? No reply from Longy. The question is too hard for him.

its not about GETTING them out, ten years after they were built but KEEPING them out at sea.

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 12^th, 2014 at 8:14am:

Bobby. wrote on Sep 11th, 2014 at 8:02pm: Bobby. wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 8:51pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 9:02am: adelcrow wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 8:57am: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 8:48am: shorten doesn't give  crap where they are built.  he just thinks there are votes in it.  that's all he ever does. Its no surprise that Longy supports Abbotts disgraceful anti South Australia campaign above all, I'd like submarines that work.  the ASC hasn't don't a particularly good job at that. Would you forgive the Aussie workers if they do manage to get all 6 Collins subs operational & out to sea? No reply from Longy. The question is too hard for him. its not about GETTING them out, ten years after they were built but KEEPING them out at sea.

All the Collins subs are undergoing an upgrade -

maybe they'll be alright now?

Bobby. wrote on Sep 12^th, 2014 at 8:25am:

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 12th, 2014 at 8:14am: Bobby. wrote on Sep 11th, 2014 at 8:02pm: Bobby. wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 8:51pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 9:02am: adelcrow wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 8:57am: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 8:48am: shorten doesn't give  crap where they are built.  he just thinks there are votes in it.  that's all he ever does. Its no surprise that Longy supports Abbotts disgraceful anti South Australia campaign above all, I'd like submarines that work.  the ASC hasn't don't a particularly good job at that. Would you forgive the Aussie workers if they do manage to get all 6 Collins subs operational & out to sea? No reply from Longy. The question is too hard for him. its not about GETTING them out, ten years after they were built but KEEPING them out at sea. All the Collins subs are undergoing an upgrade - maybe they'll be alright now?

the question is over ASC's competence.  taking ten years to get subs 'right' isn't helping their cause.

Bobby. wrote on Sep 12^th, 2014 at 8:25am:

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 12th, 2014 at 8:14am: Bobby. wrote on Sep 11th, 2014 at 8:02pm: Bobby. wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 8:51pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 9:02am: adelcrow wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 8:57am: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 8:48am: shorten doesn't give  crap where they are built.  he just thinks there are votes in it.  that's all he ever does. Its no surprise that Longy supports Abbotts disgraceful anti South Australia campaign above all, I'd like submarines that work.  the ASC hasn't don't a particularly good job at that. Would you forgive the Aussie workers if they do manage to get all 6 Collins subs operational & out to sea? No reply from Longy. The question is too hard for him. its not about GETTING them out, ten years after they were built but KEEPING them out at sea. All the Collins subs are undergoing an upgrade - maybe they'll be alright now?

Even you don't believe that the ASC is any good, otherwise you wouldn't use words like "if & maybe".


Not something we should gamble the lives of our submariners on, now is it?


I doubt you would be so keen to endanger your life just to give some cretin a job.  >:(

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 12^th, 2014 at 8:46am:

Bobby. wrote on Sep 12th, 2014 at 8:25am: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 12th, 2014 at 8:14am: Bobby. wrote on Sep 11th, 2014 at 8:02pm: Bobby. wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 8:51pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 9:02am: adelcrow wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 8:57am: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 8:48am: shorten doesn't give  crap where they are built.  he just thinks there are votes in it.  that's all he ever does. Its no surprise that Longy supports Abbotts disgraceful anti South Australia campaign above all, I'd like submarines that work.  the ASC hasn't don't a particularly good job at that. Would you forgive the Aussie workers if they do manage to get all 6 Collins subs operational & out to sea? No reply from Longy. The question is too hard for him. its not about GETTING them out, ten years after they were built but KEEPING them out at sea. All the Collins subs are undergoing an upgrade - maybe they'll be alright now? the question is over ASC's competence.  taking ten years to get subs 'right' isn't helping their cause.

After the Collins debacle, you'd think ASC would put those lessons learned into making the AWD's in a far better fashion. But no - they're now more than $500m over-budget and at least two years late. They haven't learned a single thing and if they can't get a ship right, what hope do they have with a far more complicated build such as a submarine? History would suggest the answer to that question is: little or no hope!

BigOl64 wrote on Sep 12^th, 2014 at 8:50am:

Bobby. wrote on Sep 12th, 2014 at 8:25am: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 12th, 2014 at 8:14am: Bobby. wrote on Sep 11th, 2014 at 8:02pm: Bobby. wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 8:51pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 9:02am: adelcrow wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 8:57am: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 8:48am: shorten doesn't give  crap where they are built.  he just thinks there are votes in it.  that's all he ever does. Its no surprise that Longy supports Abbotts disgraceful anti South Australia campaign above all, I'd like submarines that work.  the ASC hasn't don't a particularly good job at that. Would you forgive the Aussie workers if they do manage to get all 6 Collins subs operational & out to sea? No reply from Longy. The question is too hard for him. its not about GETTING them out, ten years after they were built but KEEPING them out at sea. All the Collins subs are undergoing an upgrade - maybe they'll be alright now? Even you don't believe that the ASC is any good, otherwise you wouldn't use words like "if & maybe". Not something we should gamble the lives of our submariners on, now is it? I doubt you would be so keen to endanger your life just to give some cretin a job.  >:(

I am all for local manufacture even at a premium on price.  but there has to be a minimum standard and in the case of aircraft or military equipment that standard has to be pretty high. failing that, we need to go elsewhere. it is a disappointment of course, but we want subs that work when we need them, not just occasionally.  when they are working that are world-class, but they aren't working often enough to be much use.

BigOl64 wrote on Sep 12^th, 2014 at 8:50am:

Bobby. wrote on Sep 12th, 2014 at 8:25am: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 12th, 2014 at 8:14am: Bobby. wrote on Sep 11th, 2014 at 8:02pm: Bobby. wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 8:51pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 9:02am: adelcrow wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 8:57am: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 10th, 2014 at 8:48am: shorten doesn't give  crap where they are built.  he just thinks there are votes in it.  that's all he ever does. Its no surprise that Longy supports Abbotts disgraceful anti South Australia campaign above all, I'd like submarines that work.  the ASC hasn't don't a particularly good job at that. Would you forgive the Aussie workers if they do manage to get all 6 Collins subs operational & out to sea? No reply from Longy. The question is too hard for him. its not about GETTING them out, ten years after they were built but KEEPING them out at sea. All the Collins subs are undergoing an upgrade - maybe they'll be alright now? Even you don't believe that the ASC is any good, otherwise you wouldn't use words like "if & maybe". Not something we should gamble the lives of our submariners on, now is it? I doubt you would be so keen to endanger your life just to give some cretin a job.  >:(

I admit that I would be too cowardly to serve in a Collins submarine.

They are having an impossible job trying to find crews.

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 12^th, 2014 at 8:54am:

I am all for local manufacture even at a premium on price.  but there has to be a minimum standard and in the case of aircraft or military equipment that standard has to be pretty high. failing that, we need to go elsewhere. it is a disappointment of course, but we want subs that work when we need them, not just occasionally.  when they are working that are world-class, but they aren't working often enough to be much use.

It is a pity some of these geniuses can't comprehend this fairly basic concept.


Australian manufacturers have failed accross the board, from submarines and aircraft (Nomad) to military clothing falling aparet soon after wearing or being highly flammable. Why should the ADF support these sheltered workshops of ineptitude.

I personally don't accept that government should be funding expensive and top-heavy 'industry businesses' that duplicate what is already in place in the public service.  Further proof that privatisation is an expensive and ineffective failure, and the reality is it is nothing more than an opportunity to pay out a few mates and cronies for their 'work' on behalf of the party.  Apparently that age of entitlement will never end and these people are above criticism and fully entitled to riches for life regardless of performance.

What is needed is an effective and lean organisation that can actually do the job - not some top-heavy white elephant.

"The Collins-class submarines experienced a wide range of problems during their construction and early service life. Many of these were attributed to the submarines being a new, untested design, and were successfully addressed as they were discovered.[65] Most systems and features worked with few or no problems, while the boats' maximum speed, manoeuvrability, and low-speed submerged endurance were found to exceed specifications.[66] The ship control system, which during development had been marked as a major potential problem, functioned beyond positive expectation: for example, the autopilot (which aboard Collins was nicknamed 'Sven') was found to be better at maintaining depth during snorting than most helmsmen.[67]

However, problems with the combat system, excessive noise, and engine breakdowns were recurring and appeared across the entire class.[68] These and other shortcomings were often made harder to solve by disagreements between Kockums, ASC, Rockwell, the RAN, and the Australian Government over the nature of problems, their causes, and who was responsible for solving them.

Following the McIntosh-Prescott Report, which indicated the long-term faults with the class that still required solving, successful efforts were made to bring the submarines to operational standard. This same period saw the dispelling of the idea, widely held within the RAN, that the Collins-class boats would be like any other vessel previously ordered by the RAN: in service with another navy, well tested, and with all the problems solved before they entered Australian hands.[75] The RAN began to realise that as the parent navy for the class, they had a greater responsibility than normal in ensuring that the boats were at an operational standard.[76]

Welding of Collins

During assembly of Collins' bow section in Sweden, multiple defects in the hull welding were discovered.[77] Different reasons were given by different parties for the problems: the steel alloy used for the hull required different welding techniques to those normally used by Kockums; the Swedish navy always requested partial penetration welds for their submarines, while the RAN wanted full penetration welding, but had not made this clear; delays in delivering the steel plates to Kockums resulted in rushed work and a resulting drop in quality.[77] Kockums engineers proposed that the section be kept in Sweden for repairs, but to minimise delays it was accepted as-is, with repairs attempted at ASC during full assembly of the first boat.[77]

However, when Collins returned to the ASC facility in April 2001 for a year-long maintenance docking, multiple welding defects were found in the bow and escape tower sections of the submarine (the two sections constructed by Kockums), while almost no problems were found in the welding of the four Australian-built sections.[78] Repairing these welds quadrupled the time Collins spent in dock."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collins-class_submarine#Problems_during_construction_and_trials

Now I don't know about you, but the problems with workmanship, to me, stem almost entirely from management - NOT from workers.  Read through and spot it for yourself.

"This same period saw the dispelling of the idea, widely held within the RAN, that the Collins-class boats would be like any other vessel previously ordered by the RAN: in service with another navy, well tested, and with all the problems solved before they entered Australian hands."

"During assembly of Collins' bow section in Sweden, multiple defects in the hull welding were discovered.[77] Different reasons were given by different parties for the problems: the steel alloy used for the hull required different welding techniques to those normally used by Kockums; the Swedish navy always requested partial penetration welds for their submarines, while the RAN wanted full penetration welding,"

Hope that helps.

BigOl64 wrote on Sep 12^th, 2014 at 9:06am:

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 12th, 2014 at 8:54am: I am all for local manufacture even at a premium on price.  but there has to be a minimum standard and in the case of aircraft or military equipment that standard has to be pretty high. failing that, we need to go elsewhere. it is a disappointment of course, but we want subs that work when we need them, not just occasionally.  when they are working that are world-class, but they aren't working often enough to be much use. It is a pity some of these geniuses can't comprehend this fairly basic concept. Australian manufacturers have failed accross the board, from submarines and aircraft (Nomad) to military clothing falling aparet soon after wearing or being highly flammable. Why should the ADF support these sheltered workshops of ineptitude.

the Nomad wasn't a failure.  and the clothing issues are about chinese-made clothing.  but the subs and boats etc have not been much of a success I admit.  t

Only the Nomad's tail section had a weakness... making it 99% successful... But on the positive side, that was fixed.

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 12^th, 2014 at 9:36am:

BigOl64 wrote on Sep 12th, 2014 at 9:06am: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 12th, 2014 at 8:54am: I am all for local manufacture even at a premium on price.  but there has to be a minimum standard and in the case of aircraft or military equipment that standard has to be pretty high. failing that, we need to go elsewhere. it is a disappointment of course, but we want subs that work when we need them, not just occasionally.  when they are working that are world-class, but they aren't working often enough to be much use. It is a pity some of these geniuses can't comprehend this fairly basic concept. Australian manufacturers have failed accross the board, from submarines and aircraft (Nomad) to military clothing falling aparet soon after wearing or being highly flammable. Why should the ADF support these sheltered workshops of ineptitude. the Nomad wasn't a failure.  and the clothing issues are about chinese-made clothing.  but the subs and boats etc have not been much of a success I admit.  t

The Nomad or as the RAAF called it the wdow maker was a airbourne killer, 172 aircraft built, 32 crashed killing a total of 76 people. A failure would be an understatement.

The government clothing factory made all my uniforms, the ones that fell apart, and the ones that threaten to burst into flames and stick to my body at the mearest hint of a flame.

The subs and boats are an extension of a litany of Australian manufacturing failures since the 70's.

Grappler Deep State Feller wrote on Sep 12^th, 2014 at 12:43pm:

Only the Nomad's tail section had a weakness... making it 99% successful... But on the positive side, that was fixed.

the 737 and A320 also had fatal flaws... and they were fixed.  doesn't mean that they are bad aircraft or boeing/airbus are bad manufacturers.

BigOl64 wrote on Sep 12^th, 2014 at 5:35pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 12th, 2014 at 9:36am: BigOl64 wrote on Sep 12th, 2014 at 9:06am: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 12th, 2014 at 8:54am: I am all for local manufacture even at a premium on price.  but there has to be a minimum standard and in the case of aircraft or military equipment that standard has to be pretty high. failing that, we need to go elsewhere. it is a disappointment of course, but we want subs that work when we need them, not just occasionally.  when they are working that are world-class, but they aren't working often enough to be much use. It is a pity some of these geniuses can't comprehend this fairly basic concept. Australian manufacturers have failed accross the board, from submarines and aircraft (Nomad) to military clothing falling aparet soon after wearing or being highly flammable. Why should the ADF support these sheltered workshops of ineptitude. the Nomad wasn't a failure.  and the clothing issues are about chinese-made clothing.  but the subs and boats etc have not been much of a success I admit.  t The Nomad or as the RAAF called it the wdow maker was a airbourne killer, 172 aircraft built, 32 crashed killing a total of 76 people. A failure would be an understatement. The government clothing factory made all my uniforms, the ones that fell apart, and the ones that threaten to burst into flames and stick to my body at the mearest hint of a flame. The subs and boats are an extension of a litany of Australian manufacturing failures since the 70's.

there is the problem right there.  GOVERNMENT run clothing factory.  it was also clearly a very long time ago.  you might try and keep up.  the subs are also not duds.  they have maintenance issues that needed resolving.

Quote:

The Opposition Leader said the ALP would not be bound by any contracts signed by the ­Coalition to buy the next fleet of submarines from Japan, saying naval projects should ensure “jobs for Aussies”.

Federal Parliamentary Labor has a responsibility to the people of South Australia to hold the LibNats to their ( ... albeit FAKE) election policy

If they let THIS one "slide" - it is a green light to the LibNats to use the same deviant techniques in ALL elections, in the future

This is NOT just about "submarines"

BigOl64 wrote on Sep 12^th, 2014 at 5:35pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 12th, 2014 at 9:36am: BigOl64 wrote on Sep 12th, 2014 at 9:06am: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 12th, 2014 at 8:54am: I am all for local manufacture even at a premium on price.  but there has to be a minimum standard and in the case of aircraft or military equipment that standard has to be pretty high. failing that, we need to go elsewhere. it is a disappointment of course, but we want subs that work when we need them, not just occasionally.  when they are working that are world-class, but they aren't working often enough to be much use. It is a pity some of these geniuses can't comprehend this fairly basic concept. Australian manufacturers have failed accross the board, from submarines and aircraft (Nomad) to military clothing falling aparet soon after wearing or being highly flammable. Why should the ADF support these sheltered workshops of ineptitude. the Nomad wasn't a failure.  and the clothing issues are about chinese-made clothing.  but the subs and boats etc have not been much of a success I admit.  t The Nomad or as the RAAF called it the wdow maker was a airbourne killer, 172 aircraft built, 32 crashed killing a total of 76 people. A failure would be an understatement. The government clothing factory made all my uniforms, the ones that fell apart, and the ones that threaten to burst into flames and stick to my body at the mearest hint of a flame. The subs and boats are an extension of a litany of Australian manufacturing failures since the 70's.

Quote:

Seven of the 28 F-111Cs and one of the 15 F-111Gs were destroyed in accidents during their service with the RAAF. These accidents took the lives of 10 air crew. The accidents occurred from 1977 to 1999.[76] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Dynamics_F-111C

1/4 of the f-111s we had crashed. What a horridly build piece of crap!

Setanta wrote on Sep 12^th, 2014 at 9:43pm:

BigOl64 wrote on Sep 12th, 2014 at 5:35pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 12th, 2014 at 9:36am: BigOl64 wrote on Sep 12th, 2014 at 9:06am: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 12th, 2014 at 8:54am: I am all for local manufacture even at a premium on price.  but there has to be a minimum standard and in the case of aircraft or military equipment that standard has to be pretty high. failing that, we need to go elsewhere. it is a disappointment of course, but we want subs that work when we need them, not just occasionally.  when they are working that are world-class, but they aren't working often enough to be much use. It is a pity some of these geniuses can't comprehend this fairly basic concept. Australian manufacturers have failed accross the board, from submarines and aircraft (Nomad) to military clothing falling aparet soon after wearing or being highly flammable. Why should the ADF support these sheltered workshops of ineptitude. the Nomad wasn't a failure.  and the clothing issues are about chinese-made clothing.  but the subs and boats etc have not been much of a success I admit.  t The Nomad or as the RAAF called it the wdow maker was a airbourne killer, 172 aircraft built, 32 crashed killing a total of 76 people. A failure would be an understatement. The government clothing factory made all my uniforms, the ones that fell apart, and the ones that threaten to burst into flames and stick to my body at the mearest hint of a flame. The subs and boats are an extension of a litany of Australian manufacturing failures since the 70's. Quote: Seven of the 28 F-111Cs and one of the 15 F-111Gs were destroyed in accidents during their service with the RAAF. These accidents took the lives of 10 air crew. The accidents occurred from 1977 to 1999.[76] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Dynamics_F-111C 1/4 of the f-111s we had crashed. What a horridly build piece of crap!

They weren't crap. They just handled differently to any other aircraft and could be difficult in certain situations.

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 12^th, 2014 at 6:26pm:

BigOl64 wrote on Sep 12th, 2014 at 5:35pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 12th, 2014 at 9:36am: BigOl64 wrote on Sep 12th, 2014 at 9:06am: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 12th, 2014 at 8:54am: I am all for local manufacture even at a premium on price.  but there has to be a minimum standard and in the case of aircraft or military equipment that standard has to be pretty high. failing that, we need to go elsewhere. it is a disappointment of course, but we want subs that work when we need them, not just occasionally.  when they are working that are world-class, but they aren't working often enough to be much use. It is a pity some of these geniuses can't comprehend this fairly basic concept. Australian manufacturers have failed accross the board, from submarines and aircraft (Nomad) to military clothing falling aparet soon after wearing or being highly flammable. Why should the ADF support these sheltered workshops of ineptitude. the Nomad wasn't a failure.  and the clothing issues are about chinese-made clothing.  but the subs and boats etc have not been much of a success I admit.  t The Nomad or as the RAAF called it the wdow maker was a airbourne killer, 172 aircraft built, 32 crashed killing a total of 76 people. A failure would be an understatement. The government clothing factory made all my uniforms, the ones that fell apart, and the ones that threaten to burst into flames and stick to my body at the mearest hint of a flame. The subs and boats are an extension of a litany of Australian manufacturing failures since the 70's. there is the problem right there.  GOVERNMENT run clothing factory.  it was also clearly a very long time ago.  you might try and keep up.  the subs are also not duds.  they have maintenance issues that needed resolving.

The ASC is government and it was building subs the same time as ACF was knocking out uniforms, so I don't see the point of your insult. Same could give a f...k attitude to manufacturing equipment for the ADF.

Equipment you can't maintain to an acceptable combat standard is a peice of sh1t, ask anyone who has to operate it.

They are a good sub when they are servicaeble, but thanks to poor maintenance and poor standards all round they are not serviceable often enough to be a strategic deterant; therefore they are useless.

Quote:

They weren't crap. They just handled differently to any other aircraft and could be difficult in certain situations.

The parrot is not dead it's stunned.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oj8RIEQH7zA

Setanta wrote on Sep 12^th, 2014 at 9:43pm:

1/4 of the f-111s we had crashed. What a horridly build piece of crap!

Yeah I know I was there for three of the crashes.

First up, the Nomad was poorly designed and poorly manufactured, it fell apart in the air even though it flew slightly faster than a crippled pidgeon.


The pig flew at over twice the speed of sound and even though it was being flown at its operational envelope a lot of the time it was usually lost due to pilot errors, not catastrophic malfuntion.

You are trying to compare apples with bricks ya winner  ;D ;D ;D


They have flown into mountains and oceans, swallow a gutfull of water into the intakes, been struck by pelicans, but it is a rare occurence that its design or maintenance that has killed the drivers.



Thanks for playing but not even a participation prize for you this time.  ;D ;D ;D

Armchair_Politician wrote on Sep 13^th, 2014 at 7:23am:

They weren't crap. They just handled differently to any other aircraft and could be difficult in certain situations.

Kinda reminds me of the 'don't kick the rudder pedals too hard ' on the A320... what a fine piece of engineering... the MiG-15 and 'don't dive too hard' - some models of Me109 with 'watch the spin'.... even the F-4U and its power dive characteristics....

FFS - these are aircraft (military ones here) that are supposed to handle all kinds of things at the speed of the human brain in a crisis. 

"Got a missile warning up our ass!"

"Kicking rudders and turning fast.. we'll shift its gyros around then turn inside its circle... oops - the vertical stabiliser fell off and we're in a spin.. buggar!  Hit eject!"

*message appears...

"Ejection system out of order - please contact manufacturer for update"

BigOl64 wrote on Sep 13^th, 2014 at 7:46am:

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 12th, 2014 at 6:26pm: BigOl64 wrote on Sep 12th, 2014 at 5:35pm: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 12th, 2014 at 9:36am: BigOl64 wrote on Sep 12th, 2014 at 9:06am: longweekend58 wrote on Sep 12th, 2014 at 8:54am: I am all for local manufacture even at a premium on price.  but there has to be a minimum standard and in the case of aircraft or military equipment that standard has to be pretty high. failing that, we need to go elsewhere. it is a disappointment of course, but we want subs that work when we need them, not just occasionally.  when they are working that are world-class, but they aren't working often enough to be much use. It is a pity some of these geniuses can't comprehend this fairly basic concept. Australian manufacturers have failed accross the board, from submarines and aircraft (Nomad) to military clothing falling aparet soon after wearing or being highly flammable. Why should the ADF support these sheltered workshops of ineptitude. the Nomad wasn't a failure.  and the clothing issues are about chinese-made clothing.  but the subs and boats etc have not been much of a success I admit.  t The Nomad or as the RAAF called it the wdow maker was a airbourne killer, 172 aircraft built, 32 crashed killing a total of 76 people. A failure would be an understatement. The government clothing factory made all my uniforms, the ones that fell apart, and the ones that threaten to burst into flames and stick to my body at the mearest hint of a flame. The subs and boats are an extension of a litany of Australian manufacturing failures since the 70's. there is the problem right there.  GOVERNMENT run clothing factory.  it was also clearly a very long time ago.  you might try and keep up.  the subs are also not duds.  they have maintenance issues that needed resolving. The ASC is government and it was building subs the same time as ACF was knocking out uniforms, so I don't see the point of your insult. Same could give a f...k attitude to manufacturing equipment for the ADF. Equipment you can't maintain to an acceptable combat standard is a peice of sh1t, ask anyone who has to operate it. They are a good sub when they are servicaeble, but thanks to poor maintenance and poor standards all round they are not serviceable often enough to be a strategic deterant; therefore they are useless.

Really, they should be replaced and retired much earlier than the planned 2030's.